Is it a REAL KJV?

Amen Shawn, that's good advice for all of us.

Welcome and thanks for the words of testimony and encouragement.

HankD

 

Shawn, good post. I have the Liberty Annotated Bible purchased along time ago through CBD for $10.00, and it was in a slipcase along with what now sells as the KJV Parallel Bible. That is an excellent Bible, nice large print, first rate notes, consistency in the NT by calling OT characters, by their OT names, i.e. Isaiah, instead of Esaias, etc. The only problem I do not care for, is that they're a little careless in the OT with their rendering of "LORD"; "Lord" see especially Psalm 110:5, although the footnotes correct it. (Genesis 18, they got it backwards, too; "LORD" for "Lord" and vice versa)
As far as the rest of your post, as an IFB Pastor I am sadened and dismayed by your treatment by the IFB Pastor and church. I'm a Baptist, a Fundamentalist, an Independent, however sometimes I find it troubling the way our movement has gone in the last 30 years. What to do? It has crossed my mind because I don't want to be associated with the extremist in the IFB movement (KJVO's, etc), to separate from the movement, what that would entail, I do not know...calling our church "Bible" church instead of "Baptist"? BTW, "Baptist" here doesn't have the same meaning as down south. Here, it carries the idea of preachers like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. Should I avoid the 'appearance of "evil"'?

 

Many good points, Shawn, especially in the light that God has different work for different believers. I believe this entails different BVs at times. For example, one would be far more effective witnessing to an immigrant with little command of English when using a modern-language BV which that person could understand far better than the 400-yr=old KJ English.

 

Robycop3

I don't speak for any other KJVOer but I would agree with you to some extent. I preached in the Phillipines and to those that don't speak English or even to those who don't have a good command of the English they do speak, the KJV is not much good for witnessing. It would be dumb indeed to insist on using a KJV to witness to a non-English speaker.

Having said that, I do know many Phillipino pastors (some who know hardly any English) who are all KJVO. What to use when witnessing is not the main issue with KJVO folk. I have gone soul-winning with 5 sheets of colored construction paper.

The critical issue is final authority. (Greek or English), (non-extant autographs or the KJV), (nothing or something). If we are right (and I believe we are), it sure is a lot more practical to teach a man English (even with some 400 year old idioms) than to require him to learn 4000 year old idioms in Greek, if he wants to get to the "bottom line".

Lacy

 

And even much more practical to use a Bible version in a form of English that they already understand or might also use in every day life... sort of like Koine Greek was when God chose it as the language of the NT.

 

This is absolutely true IF the version is correct. Two books that say different things can't be true. So how do we decide? Follow the fruit! Going to the Koine Greek autographs is not an option. Scott, do you really believe you can go to any English version for final authority. Most MVers defer to the autographs.

Lacy

 

Shawn,

Don't forget the differences in a British KJV and an American KJV, in which there are subtle differences as well.

Word to the wise, don't invite attack on this board, just assume that it will come anyway. It usually does from the KJVO crowd.

I am not a KJVO but do use it by preference while I explore other translations into a more current form of English. Having said that, the big thing for me and even many KJVO that must be understood is that of the test of time. They are not willing to let go of a translation that has stood the tests of time so very well. I for one will have to find a very good translation to make the switch myself, I am currently studying the NKJV, so far I like what I see. Just remember that it is not a sin to be KJV preferred or even KJVO in that you may not have found another translation God has given you peace about. But, it is a sin to be KJVO believing that it is the rewrite to scripture and the correction of the originals that so many would have us to beleive.

 

And by what authority do you claim or deny that a version is correct since you seem predisposed to ignore the evidence we have for the originals in favor of your own arbitrary choice?

Yes they can. That is a ridiculous statement. In fact, two books worded completely different can communicate the exact same message- which is why more than one Bible translation can be valid.

Are you proposing some sort of experential religion? What fruit? People are saved with the KJV. People are saved with all of the MV's. Cults were founded with the KJV and use it as their texts and cults use MV's... although I am not personally aware of one that likes either the NASB or NKJV. For every example of "bad fruit" you can cite related to MV's, I can cite one for the KJV.

No but going to the providentially preserved evidence for them definitely is.

No. I don't think just "any" English version qualifies. However there is a group of faithful, formal equivalency translations that do qualify. I accept and use the KJV, NASB, NKJV, and occasionally the WEB on software.

As have all fundamental Baptists all the way back to the London Confession and all orthodox Christians all the way back to at least Augustine. It is the KJVO movement that is modern and non-orthodox in its teachings.

If you really want to inspect fruit and draw some direct correlations, consider the rise of KJVOnlyism in IFB circles since the '70's as it parallels a similar rise in pharaseeism and false doctrine (such as Hyle's easy-believism).

 

This is absolutely true IF the version is correct. Two books that say different things can't be true. So how do we decide? Follow the fruit! Going to the Koine Greek autographs is not an option. Scott, do you really believe you can go to any English version for final authority. Most MVers defer to the autographs.

Lacy [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]The fruit was mentioned in the original posting. He finally saw his fruit and not the fruit only God can give.

If you don't know enough to make a wise decison see what both sides have to say first.

 

I agree completely.

It is not a rejection of the KJV to accept the validity of MV's. Taken in faith, these versions compliment and affirm one another... like the KJV translators said- a variety of translations yield the true sense of scripture.

 

Lacy, your wisdom shines in THIS thread, unlike in the "originals" thread. I knew it was there when you decided to use it. Even if he's a relative of yours, Dr. Herb Evans' perorations are often three fries short of a Happy Meal & he's not exactly a glowing example of erudition, nor is his Ambassador of Spin, Paul Gruendler. I'd find another author to quote. I believe YOU can do better than THAT.

Now, about the issue of CORRECTNESS you bring up-HOW DO YOU KNOW what version is correct & which isn't unless you can PROVE that any version's SOURCES are correct or not?

Within the Scriptures as translated into the KJV we see many apparent contradictions or differing accounts of the very same events. We cover them with the explanation that each account was written by a different person in a different time, place, or even in a different language. For example, the language Moses wrote in, or the language God wrote the 10 Commandments in, is quite different from the Hebrew used by Malachi. And, when the words from the writings of the various times are translated into a common language, they're different from one time period to the next. None of this is lost on GOD. Plainly, He provides His word AS HE CHOOSES, in the languages, dialects, & styles He chooses. Who are WE to declare a version of His word as bogus if it's a correct translation of its ancient sources? We *must* apply the VERY SAME EXPLANATIONS we use to cover the differing accounts of the same events in Scripture to the various mss that differ among themselves, especially since the differences among the mss if far less than are the differences among the narrations of the Scriptural events, which sometimes say OPPOSITE things.

I have faith that GOD has provided us with His word AS HE HAS CHOSEN. Sure, it may seem strange to read in one account that Jehoiachin began reigning at age 8, then, read in another account that he began to reign at age 18, but that's what's written, and this discrepancy has been known for THOUSANDS of years-but both accounts in general have been canonized as Scripture since well before Jesus came. I do NOT know WHY God has allowed both of these accounts to become Scripture, but plainly He HAS canonized them both. The CENTRAL message is the same; Jehoiachin became king & he did evil in God's sight. WE have no PROOF to provide us with ANY authority to declare this ms right & that ms wrong, and this extends to the BVs made from these mss.

This is part of why I totally reject the KJVO myth: its total lack of proof, and its totally man-made source. It's just a total myth.

If one wishes to use only the KJV or any other valid version, well, Hallelujah! But he/she crosses the line of good sense and factual evidence when he/she universally classifies all other versions as not valid and/or casts aspersions at anyone else's choice of version(s) that is different. You see, the KJVO doctrine simply cannot be proven correct whatsoever.

And you say it's an issue of final authority. For me, that's JESUS CHRIST.(And I assume that's true for you also!) As for final WRITTEN authority, that's the writings either spoken directly by Him, His Father, or the Holy Spirit, or the writings of man, such as the histories of the kings of Israel and Judah that God chose to become part of His word to all mankind.

By comparing Luke 4:16-21 with Isaiah 42:7-8 & with Isaiah 61:1-3, we see that our Final Authority, Jesus Christ, was NOT bound to any one copy of Scripture. If we are trying to follow His example as much as possible, why should WE be so bound? After all, all things were created by Jesus , following His Father's "blueprint", and that includes all LANGUAGES. Why should we not follow the example of He who created all the words of all the languages & presented us with most of God's word?(Except that which Yahweh Himself presented directly to man, such as when He wrote the 10 Commandments with His own finger.)

KJVO IS NOTHING BUT A FALSE, MAN-MADE MYTH.

 

JSHurley04, you're absolutely correct in saying it's OK to use only the KJV if it's the best translation for a particular person. And thanx for reminding us of the differences between a British KJV & an American KJV. This begs the question to the KJVOist as to which edition is correct.

Given the KJVOs' total inability to raise their doctrine above "myth" status with any EVIDENCE, I don't see'em doing anything but attacking your view same as they(unsuccessfully, of course) attack mine.

 

Shawn,

Thank you for your excellent post! It is so good to see one who has been on the inside of KJVOnlyism, yet has found that the truth will still set you free. I pray that others (and I pray for them by name/screen name) will come to that knowledge as well.

While the church I attend is not KJVO, I am disturbed by some faint rumblings in that direction. Things like one of the other preachers in the church saying (from the pulpit) that the KJV is the true word of God because it has stood the test of time, and that he wouldn't even open any other bible. Our pastor has taken to preaching on what women are wearing, how people are wearing their hair, etc, etc.

I come to church to worship my Lord and to learn from His word. Not to be told which translation I should be carrying, what my wife shouldn't wear, what I shouldn't watch, where I shouldn't go (the last two are non-issues for me anyway, but it still grates on my nerves).

Give me the word of God. Give me the truth of God's will. Not man-made doctrines, rules, and regulations. God will convict my heart on everything else, just give me the Word.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Lacy &gt;&gt;&gt; "I have gone soul-winning with 5 sheets of colored construction paper."

OK, I'm curious how does this work? I'd like to know. Does this work better with children or with adults. Can you post the instructions,
Or just PM them to me.

 

If 400-year-old English is as foreign to a person as is 2000-year-old Greek (why did you say 4000?), and he wants to be a Bible scholar, why teach him a language God did not choose for the Bible as opposed to a language He did choose?

 

Lacy Evans:This is absolutely true IF the version is correct. Two books that say different things can't be true.

So, which Gospel do you choose? All four of'em say different things while narrating the same events.


So how do we decide? Follow the fruit!

So which fruit of which Gospel do you follow?


Going to the Koine Greek autographs is not an option.

BUT-going to all the known extant mss IS an option. In fact, it's the RIGHT thing to do. BY WHOSE AUTHORITY does one ignore any of them?


Scott, do you really believe you can go to any English version for final authority. Most MVers defer to the autographs.

Scott will answer for himself, but let me say that you can go to any valid English version, old or new, for final authority. They all proclaim the same message from the same one and only JESUS CHRIST.

 

Thanks Dr Bob, I'll try to use that the next time I go out. I love new ways to share the gospel.

 

Thanx, Dr. Bob! JESUS did something no one else can do-took our BLACK(with sin), DIRTY(with the results of sin) "robes", washed them in His RED blood(paying the WAGES of our sins), & made'em come out WHITE(so we don't hafta pay those wages ourselves).